Revista de Odontologia da UNESP
https://revodontolunesp.com.br/article/doi/10.1590/1807-2577.19516
Revista de Odontologia da UNESP
Original Article

Microscopic evaluation of implant platform adaptation with UCLA-type abutments: in vitro study

Avaliação microscópica da adaptação da plataforma do implante com pilares protéticos do padrão UCLA: estudo in vitro

Vinícius Anéas RODRIGUES; João Paulo Mendes TRIBST; Leandro Ruivo de SANTIS; Gabriela Nogueira de Melo NISHIOKA; Dimas Renó de LIMA; Renato Sussumu NISHIOKA

Downloads: 1
Views: 754

Abstract

Abstract: Introduction: The fit between abutment and implant is crucial to determine the longevity of implant-supported prostheses and the maintenance of peri-implant bones.

Objective: To evaluate the vertical misfit between different abutments in order to provide information to assist abutment selection.

Material and method: UCLA components (N=40) with anti-rotational system were divided as follows: components usinated in titanium (n=10) and plastic components cast proportionally in titanium (n=10), nickel-chromium-titanium-molybdenum (n=10) and nickel-chromium (n=10) alloys. All components were submitted to stereomicroscope analysis and were randomly selected for characterization by SEM.

Result: Data were analyzed using mean and standard deviation and subjected to ANOVA-one way, where the groups proved to statistically different (p=<0.05), followed by Tukey’s test.

Conclusion: The selection of material influences the value of vertical misfit. The group machined in Ti showed the lowest value while the group cast in Ni Cr showed the highest value of vertical misfit.

Keywords

Dental prosthesis, dental implant

Resumo

Resumo: Introdução: O ajuste entre a prótese e o implante é fundamental para determinar a longevidade do tratamento e manutenção do osso periimplantar.

Objetivo: Avaliar o desajuste vertical entre diferentes infraestruturas metálicas e plataforma dos implantes, a fim de fornecer informação, para auxiliar na escolha do metal a ser utilizado.

Material e método: O estudo utilizou componentes do tipo UCLA (N=40), com antirrotacional, foram divididos da seguinte forma: componentes usinados em titânio (n=10), componentes fundidos em titânio (n=10), níquel-cromo-titânio-molibdênio (n=10) e em níquel-cromo (n=10). Após o torque, as amostras foram analisados em estereomicroscópio. Para caracterização em MEV, foram utilizadas as amostras mais representativas, com maior e menor desajuste vertical.

Resultado: Os dados foram analisados por média e desvio padrão e submetidos ao teste ANOVA ONE way, onde os grupos foram estatisticamente diferentes (p=<0,05), seguido do teste TUKEY.

Conclusão: A escolha do infraestrutura influencia no valor do desajuste vertical, sendo que o grupo usinado em Ti apresentou o menor valor de desajuste, e o grupo fundido em Ni Cr o grupo com maior valor de desajuste vertical.
 

Palavras-chave

Prótese dentária, implante dentário

References

Hoyer SA, Stanford CM, Buranadham S, Fridrich T, Wagner J, Gratton D. Dynamic fatigue properties of the dental implant-abutment interface: joint opening in wide-diameter versus standard diameter hex-type implants. J Prosthet Dent. 2001 Jun;85(6):599-607. PMid:11404760. http://dx.doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2001.115250.

Skalak R. Biomechanical considerations in osseointegrated prostheses. J Prosthet Dent. 1983 Jun;49(6):843-8. PMid:6576140. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(83)90361-X.

Abduo J, Judge RB. Implications of implant framework misfit: a systematic review of biomechanical sequelae. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014 May-Jun;29(3):608-21. PMid:24818199. http://dx.doi.org/10.11607/jomi.3418.

Sahin S, Cehreli MC. The significance of passive framework fit in implant prosthodontics: current status. Implant Dent. 2001;10(2):85-92. PMid:11450418. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00008505-200104000-00003.

Barbosa GAS, Bernardes SR, Neves FD, Fernandes AJ No, Mattos MGC, Ribeiro RF. Relation between implant/abutment vertical misfit and torque loss of abutment screws. Braz Dent J. 2008;19(4):358-63. PMid:19180328. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0103-64402008000400013.

Assunção WG, Barão VA, Delben JA, Gomes EA, Garcia IR Jr. Effect of unilateral misfit on preload of retention screws of implant-supported prostheses submitted to mechanical cycling. J Prosthodont Res. 2011 Jan;55(1):12-8. PMid:20627771. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpor.2010.05.002.

Bacchi A, Consani RL, Mesquita MF, Santos MB. Effect of framework material and vertical misfit on stress distribution in implant-supported partial prosthesis under load application: 3-D finite element analysis. Acta Odontol Scand. 2013 Sep;71(5):1243-9. PMid:23320569. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/00016357.2012.757644.

Lewis S, Beumer J 3rd, Hornburg W, Moy P. The UCLA abutment. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1988;3(3):183-9. PMid:3074050.

Jemt T, Book K. Prosthesis misfit and marginal bone loss in edentulous implant patients. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1996 Sep-Oct;11(5):620-5. PMid:8908860.

Sahin S, Cehreli MC. The significance of passive framework fit in implant prosthodontics: current status. Implant Dent. 2001;10(2):85-92. PMid:11450418. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00008505-200104000-00003.

Cardoso L, Daroz LGD, Fragoso WS, Consani RLX, Mesquita MF, Henriques GEP. Influência do desajuste marginal na força de destorque de parafusos protéticos. Rev Odontol UNESP. 2007;36(4):371-7.

Lewis S, Avera S, Engleman M, Beumer J 3rd. The restoration fo improperly inclined osseointegrated implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1989;4(2):147-52. PMid:2599586.

Lewis SG, Llamas D, Avera S. The UCLA abutment: a four year review. J Prosthet Dent. 1992 Apr;67(4):509-15. PMid:1507135. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(92)90082-L.

Barbosa GAS, Simamoto PC Jr, Fernandes AJ No, Mattos MGC, Neves FD. Prosthetic laboratory influence on the vertical misfit at the implant/UCLA abutment interface. Braz Dent J. 2007;18(2):139-43. PMid:17982554. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0103-64402007000200010.

Ma T, Nicholls JI, Rubenstein JE. Tolerance mesurements of various implant components. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1997 May-Jun;12(3):371-5. PMid:9197102.

Jemt T. Failures and complications in 391 consecutively inserted fixed prostheses supported by Branemark implants in edentulous jaws: a study of treatment from the time of prosthesis placement to the first annual checkup. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1991;6(3):270-6. PMid:1813395.

Ramos MB, Pegoraro LF, Takamori E, Coelho PG, Silva TL, Bonfante EA. Evaluation of UCLA implant-abutment sealing. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014 Jan-Feb;29(1):113-20. PMid:24451861. http://dx.doi.org/10.11607/jomi.3217.

Solá-Ruíz MF, Selva-Otaolaurruchi E, Senent-Vicente G, González-de-Cossio I, Amigó-Borrás V. Accuracy combining different brands of implants and abutments. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2013 Mar;18(2):e332-6. PMid:23229250. http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/medoral.18137.

Jesus Tavarez RR, Bonachela WC, Xible AA. Effect of cyclic load on vertical misfit of prefabricated and cast implant single abutment. J Appl Oral Sci. 2011 Jan-Feb;19(1):16-21. PMid:21437464. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1678-77572011000100005.

May KB, Edge MJ, Russell MM, Razzoog ME, Lang BR. The precision of fit at the implant prosthodontic interface. J Prosthet Dent. 1997 May;77(5):497-502. PMid:9151270. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(97)70143-4.
 

58a5ce280e8825bf61ea726e rou Articles
Links & Downloads

Rev. odontol. UNESP

Share this page
Page Sections